Practice question
A special penal law expressly fixes the punishment for a completed offense. A litigant invokes Article 10 solely to substitute a different RPC punishment contrary to that express scheme. Is the argument sound?
- Yes, supplementary always means overriding.
- Yes, if the litigant prefers the substituted penalty.
- Yes, because special laws are not legislation.
- No; the Code’s supplementary role does not authorize disregarding the controlling express special-law provision.
- No, because no RPC provision can ever supplement any special law.
Legal references
- Revised Penal Code, Act No. 3815, specified articles, as amended: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/28/20426; Articles 8 and 10.
- Ladonga v People, G.R. No. 141066, February 17, 2005, main decision, Article 10 and proof of conspiracy: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/feb2005/gr_141066_2005.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.